Go to page

Go to page

Private

It was suggested on another thread that I post this request for information on this thread, since its dedicated to the Mk 13 Mod 0 stock, so here goes:

There is a lot of great information in this thread, and I am trying to learn more about the history of the Navy 300 Winchester Magnum rifles - specifically the dates of when certain permutations occurred from the early 1990s to the early 2000s - before their nomenclature became Mk 13 Mod 0. Why?

Well, I have an early Mk 13 grey stock that was painted tan while in service, but I don't have a McCann/MRS rail that would designate it as a Mk 13 Mod 0. Below is what I have gathered thus far: A 2003-dated Leupold MK 4, 16x scope; Leupold medium height Mk 4 rings, Badger Ordnance Mk 13 recoil lug (in white box), a 2002 dated Turner NM sling, and an original Navy issued Kalispel case for a Mk 13.

I have a long ways to go, and still need to find an early Remington long action with a C-prefix, but I am trying to build an accurate tribute/replica of a circa 2002-03ish Navy 300 WinMag rifle, hence my interest in trying to piece together the "pre-Mk 13" history.

First, I can't recall if anyone else posted this informative article on the Mk 248 cartridge, but its very good and discusses the Navy's interest in developing an accurate 300 WinMag cartridge. This article provides excellent historical chronology for the cartridge from 1987 to 2011, but unfortunately a similar history does not exist for the Navy's 300 WinMag rifles (which as noted by Alan Brown, were often customized for the individual SEAL team member).

1993: Ammo was approved for 'evaluation' as a sniper rifle cartridge in Nov 1993, and results were very positive. The ammo was designated as Mk 248 Mod 0. Effective range was 1200 yards.

My assumption: Presumably in 1994 the Navy started using their 300 WinMag sniper rifles in operational settings with an 'approved' cartridge. I will refer to these Navy sniper rifles loosely as the "pre-Mk 13" rifles or more correctly: "Rifle 300 Mag Rem 700".

Mid-2000s: Based on experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Navy sought to improve the performance of the Mk 248 Mod 0 cartridge so it could be used effectively out to 1500 yards.

Discussion: The M91 is a Remington model 700 modified for use at sniper schools. It has a Remington trigger, a 1 in 11.2” twist chrome moly barrel, a HS Precision fiberglass stock, a Leupold 10X scope, a Harris bipod, a cleaning rod and guide, and an aluminum case. The rifle has a 1.0 MOA accuracy with M852 ammunition. Accessories: None

Discussion: The .300 WinMag is a modified Remington model 700 with a Remington trigger, a 1 in 10” twist chrome moly barrel, a McMillan fiberglass stock, a Leupold 10X scope, a Harris bipod, a cleaning rod and guide, and an aluminum case. The rifle is capable of 0.5 MOA accuracy with Mk 248 ammo. Accessories: None

I have reached out to some former Navy personnel, including the former Crane employee who invented the recoil lug for the 300 WinMag rifles. I have not spoken to Alan Brown yet, but will try to do so in the near term. With that said, here's my impression thus far of the basic chronological history - this may contain errors - but its a start in an attempt to piece together the "pre-Mk 13" history.

1990-1991: Crane made some 300 WinMag sniper rifles for NAVSPECWAR DEV GRU only. They developed a recoil lug that increased the bedding surfaces and bedding rigidity, given the 300 WinMag's recoil forces.

The other teams continued to use the 7.62x51mm sniper rifles built by Crane since 1982. In addition, around 1990-91, Redick Arms Development (RAD) provided the Navy/Crane with approx 300 long action sniper rifles in 7.62x51mm NATO, as replacements for the M86 SOCOM sniper rifle. (The M86 was a short action 7.62x51mm made by the defunct G. McMillan Rifle Company).

The Bausch & Lomb (B&L) 10x Tactical scope was initially used, which comports with the order of these scopes that the Navy procured in 1989-1990 for the old M14 Physical Security Sniper Rifle. However, the fixed M3A Ultra 10x Leupolds were also reportedly in the inventory and were presumably used as well. There is a well known picture on this thread of Kyle Defoor training with an early Navy 300 WinMag with the B&L scope.

Late 1993 appears to be when the DEV GRU teams with their WinMag sniper rifles get the new Mk 248 Mod 0 ammo, and thus were 'officially' married up, so to speak.

1994: Crane provides a sample recoil lug to Precision Reflex Inc (PRI) and they offered the lug as a commercial item, apparently called the 'Big Foot' lug. Not sure how long it was offered as a commercial item. I was told that some benchrest shooters used this lug.

1995: It is decided to provide all SPECWAR SEAL teams with 300 WinMag sniper rifles, and thus Crane converted the M91 rifles to the 300 WinMag caliber. The rifle was simply called the ‘Rifle 300 Mag Rem 700’. (I have seen references to these as "M91A2" rifles - but I don't think that is technically correct as that does not show up in the nomenclature. It might have been a RAD-based ‘marketing designation,’ as Earl Redick offered rifles commercially that were based on the Navy rifles). Navy NSNs exist for both a right-handed action and a left-handed action (Right handed action: 1005-LL-L99-5364, and left handed action: 1005-LL-L99-5477). The Navy presumably ordered a bunch of solid gray McMillan A2 stocks for these rifles, and I get the impression from one Navy source that McMillan pre-inletted the stocks for the unique Crane-developed recoil lugs.

Regarding the long action receivers, I think this history helps explain why we see old Navy aluminum transport cases with stickers that refer to “C” prefix receivers from the early 1990s. These receivers were apparently the original M91s in 7.62x51mm - but like the M24 - the M91s were long actions, so the conversation was performed, along with opening up the bolt faces for the belted 300 WinMag case. Stock picture for the early Navy "Rifle 300 Mag Rem 700 (RH)", perhaps the 1995 era.

Mid-1990s: The Navy apparently purchased the Leupold Mk 4, fixed 10X scope with M1 turrets for the M14 SSR rifles, and vintage pics of the Navy 300 WinMag rifles seem to show that same 10X Leupold scope. I suspect this is also when the old B&L 10X scopes were replaced with the Leupold Mk 4, 10x scopes.

After 9-11-2001, Crane apparently made 200 or more of these sniper rifles per year to meet operational needs. Presumably this is when all the tan colored McMillan A2 stocks were ordered. I don’t know what year they adopted the McCann rail, but I will keep researching this key piece of information. (UPDATE: McCann MRS rail introduced into supply system in 2004).

Anecdotally, per Alan Brown's comments to another forum member, some SEAL team members replaced the 10X Leupolds with the Leupold 16X scopes on their 300 WinMag rifles. The Leupold fixed 16X scopes had been used since the late 1980s on the M88 single shot 50 Caliber rifles, followed by the Mk 15 Mod 0 rifles, and thus they have been in NSW's inventory a long time. (BTW, the 10x Leupold scopes with M1 turrrets have 90 MOA of elevation adjustment, whereas the taller turrets on the 16x scopes provide a whopping 135 MOA of elevation adjustment.) I will use the 16X (top) for my 300 WinMag build, although the bottom 10X version is probably a little more 'correct' for a pre-Mk 13 replica.

As shown by USMCSGT0331, there were 3 flavors of one-piece scope rails that were used from roughly the early 1990s to early 2000s on the 300 WinMag sniper rifles. They include a Crane scope rail (or more likely Leupold rail, per NSW personnel) with Weaver slots, (top) an early PRI rail with Weaver slots, that is about 1/2" longer (bottom). Both appear to be 0 cant rails. The 3rd and final rail used a Pictatinny style rail. With his permission, here's a picture of the unmarked rail with Weaver slots that looks just like the original M24 scope rail, along with the slightly longer early PRI rail that is marked "217" on the bottom. Both of these were used on Navy 300 WinMag rifles before the Mk 13 Mod 0 McCann rail was adopted.

Honestly, I think the top rail is the same early Leupold part used on the M24 SWS circa 1988, based on the identical physical aspects of the rail, and the fact that Leupold supplied the Ultra rings to Crane at that time.

(Note: The discontinued Badger Ordnance M24 rail as shown below is identical to the rail used on the early 300 WinMag
rifles and would be a good choice for someone making a replica of a "pre-Mk 13" rifle.)

Here's a picture of US Army personnel using what I would call a ‘late pre-Mk 13’ 300 WinMag sniper rifle. Note the Picatinney scope rail, 10X Leupold scope, and black barrel. My guess is this configuration was probably the final version before the platform got the standardized Mk 13 Mod 0 designation and the McCann rail.

2004: McCann Rail System (MRS) rail was introduced and in 2004 or 05 the rifle and its nomenclature became the Mk 13, Mod 0 shortly thereafter. The repair Manual is dated December 2005.

I learned that in 2004 Crane ordered around 600 of the McCann rails, and presumably some tan McMillan A2 stocks. Not sure about the timeline of the NightForce scopes, as the Leupold 10x scopes still show up on rifles with the McCann rails.

The below pic from 2005 might be the same rifle as seen above, not sure. This is the configuration that I will seek to build with my early stock, including a black barrel, but as noted, I will be using the Leupold 16x scope instead of the 10x scope seen in this picture. I think I'll use a PRI rail that has been shortened slightly to match the length of the original rails - unless I can find an old-school/discontinued Leupold rail with Weaver slots or the Badger Ordnance M24 rail (also discontinued).

NOTE: This thread has a lot of info re the Mk 13 Mod 0, which can also be found in the Mk 13 Mod 0 Repair Manual (Dated December 2005). Its the Pre-MK13 era before the McCann rail and NF scopes that is more of the mystery. I have read that Alan Brown said there wasn't much 'process control' for the rifle in the early days and that there was a lot of variation/permutations depending on the preferences or requirements of individual SEAL team member(s). For example, one Navy veteran told me that circa 1992-93 a left-handed frogman on SEAL Team 6 had his 300 WinMag sniper rifle built with a McMillan Baker Special stock, as he preferred its ergonomics. I suspect he used a left-handed action too.

So I am sure there was some evolutionary variations in the decade before rifle got its official nomenclature as a Mk 13 Mod 0. Nonetheless, here's the topics I"m interested in understanding, to the extent possible

1. What year did the nomenclature change to Mk 13 Mod 0, which is presumably the same year the McCann rail was introduced?UPDATE: The McCann rails came into service in 2004, so the Mod 0 Type Classification was likely 2004 or 2005 at the latest.

2. What year did Crane start using Lija barrels? (I have read that the 300 WinMags used Hart, Douglass, and maybe even Krieger barrels, but clearly the Lija became the standard barrel at some point, and I was curious as to when that might have occurred). UPDATE: 1995.

3. What year did Crane start doing the SAKO-style extractor on the bolts? (I have read it might have just pre-dated the Mk 13 Mod 0 designation). UPDATE: Extractor Mod likely done to 308W bolts that were opened up for the 300 WinMag cartridge. Bolts for or from original 300 WinMag rifles might not have gotten the extractor modification...that is my impression.

4. What year did Crane start using NF scopes?UPDATE: I recently learned that the NF contract was awarded in the summer of 2005, so any Mk 13 Mod 0s made in the late summer/early autumn of 2005 and later, could have used the NF 5.5-22x scopes.

5. What year was the Mk 13 Mod 3/4 nomenclature created?UPDATE: NSN was created in 2006, but I suspect suppressed MK 13s may have been issued prior to that date...maybe.

Any assistance from those with specific knowledge re the Navy "pre-Mk 13" or “Rifle 300 Mag Rem 700" is much appreciated, thanks.

Gunny Sergeant

In Army we transitioned from Remington 40Xs in commercial MacMillan prone and A2 stocks to 700s in MacMillan A2s after Larry Freedman and a few other guys departed the new SF Sniper School in the mid-80s.

I had a number of McMillan 700 7.62 rifles in blue-grey, desert, and woodland smear camouflage A2 stocks. These were before the "Big Foot" or "Boot Lug" recoil lug, and had Sako-style extractors. All had Leupold 16Xs. I don't think the Mark 13 designation came until the mid- to late-90s when Nightforce started becoming popular.

This is kinda-close to the 7.62 700:

Many had problems with the Leupold bases "Springing." I think those were eventually replaced with Badger Ordnance rails after Marty Bordsen moved the factory from Wisconsin (I think -- I can't remember) to Kansas City.

The flat Badger was for use with the Leupold M3, and the 20-MOA for M1-16Xs.

SF CW3 Mike Haugen designed and patented the McCann MARS rail when he retired and became the Remington Military Sales rep around 2004. McCann's Spanaway, Washington machine shop (where Mike had these things made) wasn't too far from Fort Lewis.

While heavy and ergonomic, I scored an Air Force shooter at Camp Perry shooting a 22-shot 1,000-yard match using a MacMillan-stocked 300 around 1999 or 2000. He was doing well until around shot 12 when the recoil punishment just destroyed his confidence and position, and his score went into the toilet.

Sergeant

This is a original MK13 or pre MK13 bolt. I was fortunate enough to pick this up with one of the two stock I purchased. As you can see it doesn't have the extractor mod. It does have the original riveted Remington extractor. I do remember looking at some pics of the return stocks and you could see where some had the rail installed when they were rattled canned. Others were rattled canned but its apprent there was no McCann rail installed when painted.

Private

Sinister: Thanks for the info. I have read that SF CW3 Mike Haugen designed the McCann rail while he was still active duty, but still not sure when Crane ordered them and started installing them. (UPDATE: It was 2004, and I presume the Mk 13 Mod 0 designation occured concurrently with the McCann rail.) ON EDIT: That stock and action look like the old M86 rifle's made by McMillan for SOCOM. Curious what year is that picture from?

Spooledup: Thanks for the pics. The SAKO-style extractor timeline is unclear, but its good to see how they were marked by the Navy. I've made a mental note on that detail.

Massoud, thanks for that pic too of a fresh, non-painted Mk 13 Mod 0. That new looking barrel appears to be freshly powder coated or something similar when it was built at Crane. So, it appears some had barrels coated tan like that, some had black barrels, and some had the barrels left in natural stainless steel. Looks like the later tan stock too. Its interesting that as of 2005 the newly built ones like that still had a Leupold Mk 4, 10X M1 scope - but not surprising. I've heard that Alan Brown said the NF scopes came only in the later Mod 0s.

After 20 years, going anonymous..

My SF buddies "first " round in Iraq in 2003 he had a 700/300 with 16x Leupold, one piece rail of unknown original and a Sako extractor. I have a pic of it on the team room floor with the base hack sawed to take the center section out because the Sako mod to the bolt was causing the brass to bounce back into the ejection port. He hated the sako mod and suspected the only reason the early rifles had the mod was it looked like the bolt face was opened up to accommodate 300wm.

This was end user info, nothing official but he had three different versions of the mk13 before he retired and liked the 700/300 the best. Said it was more comfortable to him and inside 600 with the mk248 mod0 it was devastating.

Sergeant

My SF buddies "first " round in Iraq in 2003 he had a 700/300 with 16x Leupold, one piece rail of unknown original and a Sako extractor. I have a pic of it on the team room floor with the base hack sawed to take the center section out because the Sako mod to the bolt was causing the brass to bounce back into the ejection port. He hated the sako mod and suspected the only reason the early rifles had the mod was it looked like the bolt face was opened up to accommodate 300wm.

This was end user info, nothing official but he had three different versions of the mk13 before he retired and liked the 700/300 the best. Said it was more comfortable to him and inside 600 with the mk248 mod0 it was devastating.

Always gotta love first account opinions. I always see over the years some “expert” seem to give different accounts. Some love or hate a weapon but the expert writing the story will always tell you it was next to perfect. First account people always include the “warts” and what they did to overcome it. Even on a weapon system they loved.

Private

FatBoy, thanks for that info. Alan Brown is reportedly not a fan of the SAKO-style extractor. I might leave my bolt in original configuration, not sure yet. If you can share a picture of that rifle with its 16X scope that would be great, and thanks again for your contribution to thread.

After 20 years, going anonymous..

FatBoy, thanks for that info. Alan Brown was not a fan of the SAKO-style extractor. I might leave my bolt in original configuration, not sure yet. If you can share a picture of that rifle with its 16X scope that would be great, and thanks again for your contribution to thread.

I have zero combat experience, with or without a mk13 but after hanging out with guys who do I took their advice and left the Remington extractor in and stayed with the 700/300 configuration. I have zero regrets, it's a great platform all these years later. I don't run a clip on so there was no reason to add all the extra rails.

I really like the look of the tan barrels with the later medium tan stocks. The tech manuals say they're powder coated, but does anyone know for sure what powder coat color was used? What would the closest color match be if one were to use KG Gunkote or Cerakote?

Private

I am not an expert re Cerakote, but I do recall that their ‘SAGE’ color was very close to the FDE/tan McMillan stocks used on the Navy SSR rifles. I do not know if matches the color used on the Mk 13 barrels, but it should be very close to the stock.

Command Sgt. Major

FatBoy, thanks for that info. Alan Brown is reportedly not a fan of the SAKO-style extractor. I might leave my bolt in original configuration, not sure yet. If you can share a picture of that rifle with its 16X scope that would be great, and thanks again for your contribution to thread.

Alan is also a wealth of informaton and I posted some of his thoughts and observations from when we got together c. 2016... earlier in this thread.

One of the questions you had asked was 'when did they switch to NF scopes' and IIRC the answer was "there was not set date... but sometimes we could Leupolds, sometimes we could get NF. Eventually we started ordering just NF."

He also said that there was a lot less 'operator-bought' (either themselves or with unit credit card) scopes than legend implies. A few oddities made their way into the field and into sniper lockers and team rooms for evaluations, but for the most part, the 'run what you brung' and 'use what you were issued' mantras applied. What did happen quite a bit, though, was that teams could mix and match their gear and optics. If you're not using the scope on that Barrett on this deployment or mission, and you want that scope on your Mk13... well, it doesn't bother accounting as long as it stays on the books. So you may see an optic or accessory on something that never came from Crane... and wasn't 'user purchased' but was simply swiped off something else in the inventory.

Last, (and some other folks have asked about this from time to time) some Mk 13 Mod 0's were threaded for suppressors. But Alan said that none left Crane that way in their first iteration. In other words, a few were done at Crane when sent back for repair, rework, etc. And some were done by gunsmiths near the bases (or on bases in some instances -- where machine shops were available). But the Mod 0's were not threaded.

I am sure I'll remember some other stuff. Alan is a great guy. I first met him c. 2002 at an armorer's school at Crane. He does not frequent Interwebs discussions at all because he got tired of posting something and then having some keyboard gunsmith tell him he was wrong about the details of the guns that he built! And had a hand in designing.

@Massoud great to see you in this discussion! If you want to get first hand info from a guy who has BTDT and got the T-shirts, folks... listen to Massoud!

Private

Thanks for the input. I've read that NightForce first got military orders in the "early 2000s" but I have not yet identified the specific date of which the NXS 5.5-22X scope got its National Stock Number, which would indicate what year the Navy ordered them. (Update: I learned that the McCann rails were ordered in 2004). BTW, I think the NSN for the 16X Leupold scope (w/ Duplex reticle) you are using on your Mk 13 Mod 0 replica was created in February 2000, so the military was able to buy that scope via official channels as of early 2000. Just an fyi...

"Last, (and some other folks have asked about this from time to time) some Mk 13 Mod 0's were threaded for suppressors. But Alan said that none left Crane that way in their first iteration. In other words, a few were done at Crane when sent back for repair, rework, etc. And some were done by gunsmiths near the bases (or on bases in some instances -- where machine shops were available). But the Mod 0's were not threaded."

The suppressed versions of the Mk 13 with the McMillan A2 stock is a bit of an enigma. Very, very few pics exist, but my understanding based on researching National Stock Numbers (NSNs) is that the Mk 13 Mod 3/4 was basically the suppressed version of the Mk 13 Mod 0/1. This National Stock Number was created in 2006: https://www.iso-group.com/NSN/1005-01-537-1996

I recall seeing a picture of laser engraved bolts, presumably removed from decommissioned rifles. They were the Mk 13 Mod 3 and an M14 bolt marked Mk 14 Mod 0. Alan Brown noted that very few early Mk 13 were suppressed, and my guess is this Mod 3 bolt came off one of those rare suppressed rifles. In fact, I am pretty sure that laser engraving was only done at Crane, and not at a base or a gunsmith. The suppressor was reportedly the same KAC unit on the Mk 11 Mod 0.

So it is correct that Mod 0s per se were not threaded for the suppressor - but those early rifles with the McMillan A2 stocks that were later machined for the suppressor were apparently given a new NSN, and designated the Mk 13 Mod 3 and Mod 4 (Mod 3 was right handed, Mod 4 was left handed). At least that is my impression based on researching NSNs and anecdotals from Navy vets.

Private

Thanks for the input. I've read that NightForce first got military orders in the "early 2000s" but I have not yet identified the specific date of which the NXS 5.5-22X scope got its National Stock Number, which would indicate what year the Navy ordered them. Still researching that topic, and the McCann rail issue. BTW, I think the NSN for the 16X Leupold scope (w/ Duplex reticle) you are using on your Mk 13 Mod 0 replica was created in February 2000, so the military was able to buy that scope via official channels as of early 2000. Just an fyi...

"Last, (and some other folks have asked about this from time to time) some Mk 13 Mod 0's were threaded for suppressors. But Alan said that none left Crane that way in their first iteration. In other words, a few were done at Crane when sent back for repair, rework, etc. And some were done by gunsmiths near the bases (or on bases in some instances -- where machine shops were available). But the Mod 0's were not threaded."

The suppressed versions of the Mk 13 with the McMillan A2 stock is a bit of an enigma. Very, very few pics exist, but my understanding based on researching National Stock Numbers (NSNs) is that the Mk 13 Mod 3/4 was basically the suppressed version of the Mk 13 Mod 0/1. This National Stock Number was created in 2006: https://www.iso-group.com/NSN/1005-01-537-1996

I recall seeing a picture of laser engraved bolts, presumably removed from decommissioned rifles. They were the Mk 13 Mod 3 and an M14 bolt marked Mk 14 Mod 0. Alan Brown noted that very few Mk 13 were suppressed, and my guess is this Mod 3 bolt came off one of those rare suppressed rifles. In fact, I am pretty sure that laser engraving was only done at Crane, and not at a base or a gunsmith. The suppressor was reportedly the KAC Mk 11.

So it is correct that Mod 0s per se were not threaded for the suppressor - but those early rifles with the McMillan A2 stocks that were later threaded for the suppressor were apparently given a new NSN, and designated the Mk 13 Mod 3 and Mod 4 (Mod 3 was right handed, Mod 4 was left handed). At least that is my impression based on researching NSNs and anecdotals from Navy vets.

I don't have any info on the rebuilds...just some inventory info from that time.
The lowest serial number Mod 5 I have info on is G65538XX (that was inventoried as early as December 2008), so that would overlap with the known Mod 3 at the east coast teams.

Sergeant

On the subject of receivers, I have started collecting pieces for a MK 13 MOD 0, I am searching for a "C" prefix receiver. If anyone has any info of where and how to get one I would appreciate it very much! I have really learned a lot from this thread guys, thanks again, Jerry

Command Sgt. Major

On the subject of receivers, I have started collecting pieces for a MK 13 MOD 0, I am searching for a "C" prefix receiver. If anyone has any info of where and how to get one I would appreciate it very much! I have really learned a lot from this thread guys, thanks again, Jerry

Your best bet is to watch gunbroker and buy a hunting rifle with a c prefix. The one I bought was not a .300, but had the right bolt face. It was very, very cheap! In the $400 range iirc. That was before I sold the barrel and stock on eBay.

Finding an action alone... good luck. Just watch GB. Used 700 hunting rifles sell for squat.

Sergeant

Your best bet is to watch gunbroker and buy a hunting rifle with a c prefix. The one I bought was not a .300, but had the right bolt face. It was very, very cheap! In the $400 range iirc. That was before I sold the barrel and stock on eBay.

Finding an action alone... good luck. Just watch GB. Used 700 hunting rifles sell for squat.

Sergeant of the Hide

None of them has an anchor stamp and only 1 had a serial number. Most of the steel ones have "11L17" laser engraved on the bottom, probably the steel type. None of the aluminum lugs are marked. I'm also selling these, so message me if you want any.

Some folks actually have a CAD drawing and have had them made for their current builds. Just because it's "old technology" and not the current use (mostly because they're in a chassis now) doesn't mean they don't work.?

Gunny Sergeant

Some folks actually have a CAD drawing and have had them made for their current builds. Just because it's "old technology" and not the current use (mostly because they're in a chassis now) doesn't mean they don't work.?

My return stock build has a "new" lug in it... I believe that USMCSGT0331 had them made for the return stock's that he has sold so far. However, the "hardcore clone folks" would like an issued lug in their build even though it can't be seen.

Sergeant of the Hide

My return stock build has a "new" lug in it... I believe that USMCSGT0331 had them made for the return stock's that he has sold so far. However, the "hardcore clone folks" would like an issued lug in their build even though it can't be seen.

You're correct, I had new lugs made in order to help people build their original stocks. You're also correct about the cloner aspect, we're a crazy group, lol. I was absolutely stunned to see these lugs come up for sale and I'm really happy to see them being matched up with original stocks. Out of the 55 lugs I received, only 15 are left.

Private

Hey Gents,
Sorry to change the subject, but I need so info from the experts regarding my MK13 Mod 0. RWS Gunsmithing recently completed my build on an official stock from USMCSGT0331 and it is awesome. I mounted my NXS 5.5-22x56 in Nightforce X-Treme Duty High rings, (1.125") and the objective housing is extremely close to the rail. Are these rings the correct height for a spec build? Anyone notice the scope hitting the rail during recoil? I have not taken it to the range yet. Any thoughts? Thank you,

Gunny Sergeant

Hey Gents,
Sorry to change the subject, but I need so info from the experts regarding my MK13 Mod 0. RWS Gunsmithing recently completed my build on an official stock from USMCSGT0331 and it is awesome. I mounted my NXS 5.5-22x56 in Nightforce X-Treme Duty High rings, (1.125") and the objective housing is extremely close to the rail. Are these rings the correct height for a spec build? Anyone notice the scope hitting the rail during recoil? I have not taken it to the range yet. Any thoughts? Thank you,

Private

I am not an expert, and this issue seems a little confusing as it looks like both ring heights have been used.
1. The Technical Repair Manual from 2005 for the Mk 13 Mod 0 lists rings as being 1.125" tall. (see below picture)
2. However, as noted in my earlier post, some builders use 1.265" rings (like the clone in the movie, American Sniper).

That difference in ring height is only 0.14" or about 1/8" (or 3.5 mm). Alan Brown is probably one of the few people that might know if the Navy switched to the slightly higher rings (1.265") at some point during the Mk 13 Mod 0 build era. Others may know more...

My opinion? If you can't slide a standard (paper) business card between the scope's objective bell and the McCann rail, then I would consider the slighter higher rings. You won't know if their is enough "barrel whip" upon firing that would cause the rail to perhaps rub on the bottom of the scope's objective bell, unless you try it, but obviously that would be bad if it did rub due to 'barrel whip' - as it would put a lot of stress on the rail's mounting screws and other components.

The challenge is that your rings are already painted and thus you'd have to ask your builder to Cerakote or paint the higher rings. So, if you are worried about the tight clearance, discuss it with your builder, swapping rings isn't a huge deal as long as they can be painted to match the current rings. The manual lists the lower rings, but its at least theoretically possible that might have changed. My 2cts.

Private

@Random Guy ,
I saw the same thing in the manual, that's why I went with the 1.125" rings. There is probably about 1-1.5mm clearance around the radius'd cut around the bell of the objective, slightly more along the flat portion of the Pic Rail. I did order a set of 1.265" rings which should be in this week. Thanks for the information!

That does seem excessive and lack of communication is always a red flag. Best bet may be to write a nice letter asking for your parts back and send to another Smith.

Sometimes, no matter how good someone’s reputation, you simply don’t hit it off. Move on.

And, yes, got mine done in a year... but I also dropped parts off personally, went out with him and his wife for a nice meal where we talked cars and not guns... he was also my armorers course instructor many moons ago at Crane, which he didn’t remember. But gave another point of contact. Then I left him alone on his schedule.

But, yes, it was supposed to be 6 months. And took a year. Then all the stocks dropped and the line is huge as everyone wants one. I was just lucky enough to buy one of the first stocks and get to Indiana before anyone else. Still worth the wait!

But I understand... I’d move to another shop where your project will be delivered faster and you will be happier with the pace. It’s a hobby... if something is not making you happy in the process... change it! Find a gunsmith who fits your personality, because there are a lot of expert ones out there and just because one is not a fit, doesn’t mean there aren’t others who can build as good (or better) for you!!

Cheers, Sirhr

P.s I have a Vickers that has been at a c111 specialty shop more than 4 years. Still worth it to have it done by the master himself. But most others would have gone elsewhere by now. I am probably too patient.

PPS. Dropping my .416 capstick off at NECG tomorrow for them to finish stock and metal. They said 6 months before they can even look at it. Minimum a year to get back. Which is fine. Because I have another of their rifles and it is worth the wait to me. But others would say... I want it back in less than 6 months, not willing to accept a backlog that long. I understand that view, totally. We all have our schedules and preferences. And if a year from now it’s not done.... it won’t bother me. Unless I have an Africa hunt planned, then I will ask nicely and with a lot of lead time if they can accommodate.

Sergeant

As stated before, its not a full on spec build but it is as close as I can resonable get it. Probably the only Mark 13 mod 5 (ish) in Scandinavia. This time with the Ase Utra Muzzle brake, as I am giving it a try.

Is the mod5 still in use somewhere, or has it been replaced with the mod7 and soon enough the ASR?

Private

As stated before, its not a full on spec build but it is as close as I can resonable get it. Probably the only Mark 13 mod 5 (ish) in Scandinavia. This time with the Ase Utra Muzzle brake, as I am giving it a try.

Looks nice man. I think you can pass since knights doesn't distribute in your country, lol. Much easier to do a MOD 7 clone nowadays no matter where you live though.
The Navy might still have some kicking around, there's photos of Eddie Gallagher with a stiller action mod 5, not sure how recent that was but I assume it was relatively recent in Iraq/Syria. Then like 2 years ago a SEAL ran one at a sniper comp.

Sergeant

Looks nice man. I think you can pass since knights doesn't distribute in your country, lol. Much easier to do a MOD 7 clone nowadays no matter where you live though.
The Navy might still have some kicking around, there's photos of Eddie Gallagher with a stiller action mod 5, not sure how recent that was but I assume it was relatively recent in Iraq/Syria. Then like 2 years ago a SEAL ran one at a sniper comp.

Doing full spec builds is not a thing around here. There was a norwegian guy who built a m40a5 some years ago, but that is about the only other one that I know of. Im still on the look out for an older AICS folding stock, they do show up on the used market every now and again, so there is some hope on getting one. It would make it look a bit more authentic. Thanks for the feedback on my question.

Go to page

Sniper’s Hide is a community of Snipers of all kinds, focusing on long range shooting, accuracy, and ballistics. Founded by Frank Galli in 2014, Sniper’s Hide has been offering informational videos, podcasts, and other support to it’s users in one location.